Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.

Oklahoma "Creationism Bill"

Oklahoma's most recent creationism measure has made it over its latest hurdle.

The Oklahoma Common Education committee passed the Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act Tuesday in a close 9-8 vote, Mother Jones reports.

Introduced by Republican state Rep. Gus Blackwell,the legislation would "permit teachers, schools, and students to explore alternative theories without repercussions," the Week columnist Dana Liebelson writes.

In layman's terms, students would be able to challenge universally accepted scientific theories, such as evolution and climate change. Teachers would also be required to find more effective ways to address such controversies in their teachings.

The legislation's language specifically mentions "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning" as subjects that may spark controversy in the classroom.

While creationism bills have often been linked to religion, Blackwell insists that the legislation's focus is scientific exploration.

"I proposed this bill because there are teachers and students who may be afraid of going against what they see in their textbooks," Blackwell explained to Mother Jones. "A student has the freedom to write a paper that points out that highly complex life may not be explained by chance mutations."

House Bill 1674 mirrors another creationism measure co-authored by Blackwell -- Senate Bill 758 -- that is currently being considered by the state's Senate Education committee. If passed, H.B. 1674 would take effect on July 1 and would be implemented in the state during the 2013-2014 school year. Oklahoma's House of Representatives will vote on the legislation next.

Blackwell's bill is not the first creationism measure Oklahoma has seen. In 2012, a similar proposal survived an initial rejection by the state's House Common Education Committee, only to die in the Senate Education Committee.

H.B. 1674 is one of several "academic freedom" bills that are being touted by state republicans. According to the National Center for Science Education, Montana, Arizona, Missouri and Indiana are also considering similar pieces of legislation. Thus far this year, Colorado has been the only state to turn down an Oklahoma's most recent creationism measure has made it over its latest hurdle.

The Oklahoma Common Education committee passed the Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act Tuesday in a close 9-8 vote, Mother Jones reports.

Introduced by Republican state Rep. Gus Blackwell,the legislation would "permit teachers, schools, and students to explore alternative theories without repercussions," the Week columnist Dana Liebelson writes.

In layman's terms, students would be able to challenge universally accepted scientific theories, such as evolution and climate change. Teachers would also be required to find more effective ways to address such controversies in their teachings.

The legislation's language specifically mentions "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning" as subjects that may spark controversy in the classroom.

While creationism bills have often been linked to religion, Blackwell insists that the legislation's focus is scientific exploration.

"I proposed this bill because there are teachers and students who may be afraid of going against what they see in their textbooks," Blackwell explained to Mother Jones. "A student has the freedom to write a paper that points out that highly complex life may not be explained by chance mutations."

House Bill 1674 mirrors another creationism measure co-authored by Blackwell -- Senate Bill 758 -- that is currently being considered by the state's Senate Education committee. If passed, H.B. 1674 would take effect on July 1 and would be implemented in the state during the 2013-2014 school year. Oklahoma's House of Representatives will vote on the legislation next.

Blackwell's bill is not the first creationism measure Oklahoma has seen. In 2012, a similar proposal survived an initial rejection by the state's House Common Education Committee, only to die in the Senate Education Committee.

H.B. 1674 is one of several "academic freedom" bills that are being touted by state republicans. According to the National Center for Science Education, Montana, Arizona, Missouri and Indiana are also considering similar pieces of legislation. Thus far this year, Colorado has been the only state to turn down an Oklahoma's most recent creationism measure has made it over its latest hurdle.

The Oklahoma Common Education committee passed the Scientific Education and Academic Freedom Act Tuesday in a close 9-8 vote, Mother Jones reports.

Introduced by Republican state Rep. Gus Blackwell,the legislation would "permit teachers, schools, and students to explore alternative theories without repercussions," the Week columnist Dana Liebelson writes.

In layman's terms, students would be able to challenge universally accepted scientific theories, such as evolution and climate change. Teachers would also be required to find more effective ways to address such controversies in their teachings.

The legislation's language specifically mentions "biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning" as subjects that may spark controversy in the classroom.

While creationism bills have often been linked to religion, Blackwell insists that the legislation's focus is scientific exploration.

"I proposed this bill because there are teachers and students who may be afraid of going against what they see in their textbooks," Blackwell explained to Mother Jones. "A student has the freedom to write a paper that points out that highly complex life may not be explained by chance mutations."

House Bill 1674 mirrors another creationism measure co-authored by Blackwell -- Senate Bill 758 -- that is currently being considered by the state's Senate Education committee. If passed, H.B. 1674 would take effect on July 1 and would be implemented in the state during the 2013-2014 school year. Oklahoma's House of Representatives will vote on the legislation next.

Blackwell's bill is not the first creationism measure Oklahoma has seen. In 2012, a similar proposal survived an initial rejection by the state's House Common Education Committee, only to die in the Senate Education Committee.

H.B. 1674 is one of several "academic freedom" bills that are being touted by state republicans. According to the National Center for Science Education, Montana, Arizona, Missouri and Indiana are also considering similar pieces of legislation. Thus far this year, Colorado has been the only state to turn down an academic freedom bill, postponing it indefinitely in committee.

SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codifiedin the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 11-121 of Title 70, unless thereis created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:

This act shall be known and may be cited as the “ScientificEducation and Academic Freedom Act”.

SECTION 2. NEW LAW A new section of law to be codifiedin the Oklahoma Statutes as Section 11-122 of Title 70, unless thereis created a duplication in numbering, reads as follows:A. The Oklahoma Legislature finds that an important purpose ofscience education is to inform students about scientific evidenceand to help students develop critical thinking skills they need inorder to become intelligent, productive, and scientifically informedcitizens. The Legislature further finds that the teaching of somescientific concepts including but not limited to premises in theareas of biology, chemistry, meteorology, bioethics and physics cancause controversy, and that some teachers may be unsure of theexpectations concerning how they should present information on somesubjects such as, but not limited to, biological evolution, thechemical origins of life, global warming, and human cloning.B. The State Board of Education, district boards of education,district superintendents and administrators, and public schoolprincipals and administrators shall endeavor to create anenvironment within public elementary and secondary schools thatencourages students to explore scientific questions, learn aboutscientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respondappropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion aboutcontroversial issues. Educational authorities in this state shallalso endeavor to assist teachers to find more effective ways topresent the science curriculum where it addresses scientificcontroversies. Toward this end, teachers shall be permitted to helpstudents understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objectivemanner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses ofexisting scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught.C. The State Board of Education, a district board of education,district superintendent or administrator, or public school principalor administrator shall not prohibit any teacher in a school districtin this state from helping students understand, analyze, critique,and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths andscientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent tothe course being taught.D. Students may be evaluated based upon their understanding ofcourse materials, but no student in any public school or institutionshall be penalized in any way because the student may subscribe to aparticular position on scientific theories. Nothing in thissubsection shall be construed to exempt students from learning,understanding and being tested on curriculum as prescribed by stateand local education standards.E. The provisions of the Scientific Education and AcademicFreedom Act shall only protect the teaching of scientificinformation, and shall not be construed to promote any religious ornonreligious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against aparticular set of religious beliefs or nonbeliefs, or promotediscrimination for or against religion or nonreligion. The intentof the provisions of this act is to create an environment in whichboth the teacher and students can openly and objectively discuss thefacts and observations of science, and the assumptions that underlietheir interpretation.F. By no later than the start of the 2013-2014 school year, theState Department of Education shall notify all districtsuperintendents of the provisions of the Scientific Education andAcademic Freedom Act. Each superintendent shall then disseminate toall employees within the district a copy of the provisions of thisact.

SECTION 3. This act shall become effective July 1, 2013.

SECTION 4. It being immediately necessary for the preservationof the public peace, health and safety, an emergency is herebydeclared to exist, by reason whereof this act shall take effect andbe in full force from and after its passage and approval.

B. The State Board of Education, district boards of education,district superintendents and administrators, and public schoolprincipals and administrators shall endeavor to create anenvironment within public elementary and secondary schools thatencourages students to explore scientific questions, learn aboutscientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respondappropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion aboutcontroversial issues. Educational authorities in this state shallalso endeavor to assist teachers to find more effective ways topresent the science curriculum where it addresses scientificcontroversies. Toward this end, teachers shall be permitted to helpstudents understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objectivemanner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses ofexisting scientific theories pertinent to the course being taught.

As a teacher, I'd like to ask the Oklahoma legislators how they suggest I go about teaching children to respect differences of opinion about controversial issues such as whether the Earth is flat, whether our fate is determined by the astrological sign we're born under, geocentrism, whether diseases are caused by germs or demons, and many others.

D. Students may be evaluated based upon their understanding ofcourse materials, but no student in any public school or institutionshall be penalized in any way because the student may subscribe to aparticular position on scientific theories. Nothing in thissubsection shall be construed to exempt students from learning,understanding and being tested on curriculum as prescribed by stateand local education standards.

Tricky one.

On the face of it, that sounds reasonable.

But I'm scared of the "penalized in any way" part. Does that means tests must be worded such that they are as easy to answer for someone who disagrees with the material? So instead of asking:

"Question 12. What elements in Chlorophyll are responsible for its colour?"

it would have to be reworded to:

"Question 12. According to the scientific theories selected this year by our state, what elements in Chlorophyll are responsible
for its colour?"

I hate to think what message that would send the children about the nature of Science.

C. The State Board of Education, a district board of education,district superintendent or administrator, or public school principalor administrator shall not prohibit any teacher in a school districtin this state from helping students understand, analyze, critique,and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths andscientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories pertinent tothe course being taught.E. The provisions of the Scientific Education and AcademicFreedom Act shall only protect the teaching of scientificinformation, and shall not be construed to promote any religious ornonreligious doctrine, promote discrimination for or against aparticular set of religious beliefs or nonbeliefs, or promotediscrimination for or against religion or nonreligion. The intentof the provisions of this act is to create an environment in whichboth the teacher and students can openly and objectively discuss thefacts and observations of science, and the assumptions that underlietheir interpretation.

Children are often more capable than we think they are. And we love the idea that the 'fair' way to do something is to bring out all the ideas, then objectively evaluate them.

But the sad fact is that science is complicated. The science we teach in schools is the tip of the iceberg. The bits that we can make easy to understand. The bits that you don't need several years of higher maths just to understand the question, let alone understand the answer.

On something like evolution or global warming, even most adults find it hard to evaluate which arguments are reasonable. A teacher determined to push a creationist agenda who dumps upon a class a whole load of arguments from the answer-in-genesis website would be free to do so under this wording, and the chances that any of the children would be able to argue effectively against them in an open classroom discussion are minimal.

So, despite the pretty wording, the net effect of passing the legislation wouldn't be to leave pupils with a better grasp of science and the surrounding issues. It would be a hunting license to allow teachers who want to, to snow the pupils, fogging their grasp and leaving them just with the impression "It is a controversy. There are points on both sides".

The creationist side doesn't need to convince with logic and evidence. It just needs to cast enough doubt to provide an excuse to set logic and evidence aside. It convinces with emotional appeal to religious arguments (presented elsewhere to the child, from birth).

Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.